Compact Flash memory cards

Discussion in 'Photography Equipment & Products' started by Hobbes, Jul 17, 2008.

  1. Hobbes

    Hobbes TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2008
    Messages:
    954
    Likes Received:
    4
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    I am looking for a CF memory card for my new camera and wondering which will be the best for the money. I kinda like the Sandisk Extreme III 2 Gb card because it's ability to operate in extreme temperatures and its cheap but then I saw Extreme IV which is twice as fast so I wonder do I really need such a fast CF card or will Extreme III be enough?
     
    Last edited: Jul 17, 2008
  2. Mullen

    Mullen TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2008
    Messages:
    457
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Westville, OK
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    I have a 4GB Extreme III in my 40D, it'll take pictures about as fast as you click the button. Doubt you'll notice any difference with an Extreme IV.
     
  3. kundalini

    kundalini Been spending a lot of time on here!

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2007
    Messages:
    13,601
    Likes Received:
    1,929
    Location:
    State of Confusion
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    Unless your camera supports the UMDA (Ultra Memory Direct Access) technology in CompactFlash, the Extreme IV will be of no benefit to you. The Nikon D300 was one of the first to do so. Lexar, Delkin and Hoodman are also manufacturing these faster write cards. FYI.
     
  4. Bifurcator

    Bifurcator TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2008
    Messages:
    3,312
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Japan
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    What do you mean "best for the money"? If you mean the best price|performance ratio then A-Data has the best price (last I looked) and good performance on most cameras.

    Writing out the 21-shot raw buffer (of 21 black images) on the D200:
    A-Data 4GB 266x: ........ 31 sec.
    A-Data 4GB 133x: ........ 37 sec.
    Transcend 4GB 120x: .... 48 sec.
    Sony 4GB 133x: ........... 36 sec.
    Lexar PII 4GB 60x: ....... 53 sec.​

    Pasted from another post of mine:

    In my current camera (3 frame RAW buffer K/M A2) I notice the difference between the different speeds. I notice from between the <100 cards to the 133 cards and from the 133s to the >250s. But what really makes the faster cards worth it is the read/write speed to/from the computer. Most of my cards are >250 and I really love browsing around right off the cards or editing the RAWs and saving the 50 to 200 meg PSD files back to the card - all almost instantly. As you saw above in the D200 example it may or may not be worth it depending on how you shoot (RAW, JPEG, Continuous, Short Bursts, etc.).

    I think that if you have a pro/semi-pro camera that the speed increases between cards only shows up in the shot-to-shot tween-times AFTER the shot-buffer is full and needs to offload to the card. If you're still taking shots at that point it can make as much as 2 seconds per frame difference in 133 to 266 on some card/camera/setting combinations. If as Kun man points out, your camera can utilize the faster speeds.

    For computer browsing allot may depend on the card reader but I guess I've been lucky - all my no-name $10 readers can achieve the 55~60MB/s sustained. Anyway, the speeds for me (8-core MacPro) when browsing icon pages of 10x6 rows at this size:

    [​IMG]

    are instant at 266, take about 2 to 4 seconds on 133 cards (barely bearable) and are unreasonable on the <100 cards. The 266 cards keep up with any scroll speed I browse at. When I'm in coverflow mode:


    the images off the 266 cards just zip into place. I guess the update speed is about 15 images per second so I can scroll onto/off-of the screen about 15 per/sec and never see a blank image updating nor have to wait. I guess the 133 cards are about 6 or 7 IPS which feels rather sluggish and again the <100 cards are too slow to be any fun.

    Writing a 50 MB PSD file to a 266 cards takes about 2 or 3 seconds by the time everything returns. About 4 to 5 seconds (a little too long for me) on the 133 cards and I may as well pour some coffee on the <100 cards. Reading a single PSD file of 50 MB or loading a 12 MB RAW file into Adobe is instant on both 133 and 266 cards and I dunno what it takes on the <100 cards any more (I still have a few but don't use them much).

    Copying the entire card over to the HD I get 33 to 35 MB/s (or about 3 RAW files per second) on the 266s (300 images takes just a tad less than 2min.), half that for the 133s (which seems too long) and entirely too long on the <100 cards.
     
    Last edited: Jul 17, 2008
  5. Hobbes

    Hobbes TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2008
    Messages:
    954
    Likes Received:
    4
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    Thanks for the replies everyone!

    yeah this is the card I am interested in and its cheap 60 US dollars compared to 90+ for IV.


    hmm I don't think EOS 40D has that feature or does it? :) well I like Sandisk Extreme cards for their ability to perform in extreme temperatures -25º C to 85º C (-13F - 185F)

    well first of all there aren't many brands I can choose. I think the most common CF cards here are either Kingston or Sandisk with a few stores selling Transcend, thats Sweden for ya ^^ well I probably should have mentioned that when I created this thread :D but thanks though
    As for computer browsing well I doubt I will do whole a lot of that because I am currently using an almost four years old computer even though I have been upgrading it through the years its still extremely slow compared to your MacPro :D
     
    Last edited: Jul 17, 2008

Share This Page